1. We have to sign 2007 and 2008 draft picks. Figure 9 players for less than $6M (unless SF stinks). Now we have $28.7M with 45 players signed.
2. We need to replace or re-sign our receiving corps. Figure $8M on two players in addition to our draft picks. ($20.7M with 47 players).
3. We need to replace or re-sign Colvin and Bruschi. Figure $8M for two players. ($12.7M with 49 players).
4. We need to replace Asante's contribution to our secondary. (I figure that Gay and Wilson can be replaced via the aforementioned new draftees. If we lose Harrison, his loss will also provide us with additional cap space.) Figure $7M for one player.

That leaves us with $5.7M and three roster spots, a perfectly responsible place to be heading into the 2008 season.

NONE of this involves any backloaded Indy style contracts, so we could easily manufacture an additional $10-$20M if we were willing to pay for it in future seasons. (Brady's cap hit over the final two seasons of his contract [if not extended] would be $13.5M per, which is probably underpaying for two years of Brady at his prime. Compare to Peyton's hit over the same period of $20.0M per.)

* Its just a curious coincidence that these three different contracts all result in the same cap savings.

** Assumes that $5M of $6M salary turned into bonus, and that left over cap space from this year is rolled into next year via LTBE loophole.

*** Assumes that $3M roster bonus and $4M of $5M salary turned into signing bonus. After these two restructurings, the final two years of Brady's contract would carry cap hits of $14.4M and $12.6M instead of $10.6M and $8.9M

Cut Colvin? WTF?!
It makes even less sense given you're left with $1.8 M in dead money to cut a guy who's been flying around and making plays all over the field the past two years.

Click to expand...

I don't think Colvin is a guaranteed cut. In fact, if he plays in 2007 like he played in 2006, I think we keep him. But the bottom line is that there is $5.5M available for us either to keep Colvin, or to find his replacement.

If we signed him to an extension, that would be the best of both worlds, but it assumes that he'll be willing to play for what we're willing to pay.

Cut Colvin? WTF?!
It makes even less sense given you're left with $1.8 M in dead money to cut a guy who's been flying around and making plays all over the field the past two years.

Click to expand...

BTW, your logic is badly flawed. That $1.8M is GONE. We spent it long ago. It doesn't matter whether Colvin plays for us in 2008 or not. We've still lost $1.8M from our 2008 cap for giving him that bonus.

The fact that the $1.8M appears on our cap in 2008 is just an accounting gimmick. It has no bearing on reality. The reality is that Colvin is scheduled to earn $5.5M in 2008. We can either pay him the money or cut him.

29 year old Colvin was worth that much. 31 year old Colvin, I'm not so sure about.

Accounting gimmick, eh? Well, we can say the same about each and every salary contract ever signed in the salary cap era then. The question remains: will Colvin's dead money appear in the books in '08 if he's released as you suggest. And if indeed that $1.8M in dead money is in the books in '08, why the hell would you release a very solid vet LB to save $3 million and change when as you've calculated, the team is in great cap shape to begin with?

Accounting gimmick, eh? Well, we can say the same about each and every salary contract ever signed in the salary cap era then. The question remains: will Colvin's dead money appear in the books in '08 if he's released as you suggest. And if indeed that $1.8M in dead money is in the books in '08, why the hell would you release a very solid vet LB to save $3 million and change when as you've calculated, the team is in great cap shape to begin with?

Click to expand...

1. Colvin's dead money will appear in the books even if he stays on the team.

2. As I posted above, we would save $5.5M.

Per Miguel, his 2008 cap hit is $7,334,720 of which $1,828,000 is dead money. We save $5,506,720 by cutting him.

1. Colvin's dead money will appear in the books even if he stays on the team.

2. As I posted above, we would save $5.5M.

Per Miguel, his 2008 cap hit is $7,334,720 of which $1,828,000 is dead money. We save $5,506,720 by cutting him.

Is a 31 year old Colvin worth $5.5M? I'm not sure.

Click to expand...

Most players are still in their prime at 31, with the exception of maybe running backs. The question with Colvin though is if the bad hip injury he suffered will affect his overall shelf life. If it doesn't, then I would say in this day in age 5.5 million is absolutely worth it for a Colvin caliber LB. Especially give the fact that we don't exactly have great young linebackers coming out of our ears here.

Most players are still in their prime at 31, with the exception of maybe running backs. The question with Colvin though is if the bad hip injury he suffered will affect his overall shelf life. If it doesn't, then I would say in this day in age 5.5 million is absolutely worth it for a Colvin caliber LB. Especially give the fact that we don't exactly have great young linebackers coming out of our ears here.

Click to expand...

eh, 31 for a LB reliant on speed is probably past his prime, prime years being 27-30 or something like that. at the least he is on the wrong side of his career.

teams in all sports make big mistakes paying for 31 YO's who have produced at a high level, b/c their best years are almost certainly behind them.

1. Colvin's dead money will appear in the books even if he stays on the team.

2. As I posted above, we would save $5.5M.

Per Miguel, his 2008 cap hit is $7,334,720 of which $1,828,000 is dead money. We save $5,506,720 by cutting him.

Is a 31 year old Colvin worth $5.5M? I'm not sure.

Click to expand...

OK, I didn't read the figures too carefully so my mistake on the total cap saving. Still, even at 31 and given his level of play, what would his replacement cost and wouldn't a simple restructure solve the problem of a high cap hit should the team find itself in a position in need of cap relief?

eh, 31 for a LB reliant on speed is probably past his prime, prime years being 27-30 or something like that. at the least he is on the wrong side of his career.

teams in all sports make big mistakes paying for 31 YO's who have produced at a high level, b/c their best years are almost certainly behind them.

Click to expand...

Teams sometimes get in trouble when they pay NEW big deals to players over 31, but it's a completely different matter to let a 31 year old player play out the deal he had signed a few years ago. We are already off the hook for a large part of the money.

And Roman Phifer and Seau, who were both 36 or 37. These players have proved that you can be old but still be a productive linebacker in this system.

Click to expand...

None of these guys were making $5.5M per year at that point. Again I don't think its insane to pay Colvin this much. If that was his salary this year (its not, he's making $900K less) I'd be in favor of paying the money, based on his performance last season.

But if he has an off year this season (not a terrible year, just one which is clearly worse than 2006), I'd give him a choice of taking less than $5.5M or getting cut when the rosters go down to 53 (We could always keep him if at that point if none of our prospective replacements work out in training camp).

And Roman Phifer and Seau, who were both 36 or 37. These players have proved that you can be old but still be a productive linebacker in this system.

Click to expand...

Right, and I suppose signing AD to a longterm contract was also a mistake given he's.....what....20 days older than Colvin?!

Barring Colvin's hip falling off, I want the guy back in '08 even if it means taking a $7+M hit on the cap. That's presuming the worst that the brass and he were unable to work out a restructure or extension for two to three years.

A lot of Brady's money was pushed out of the 2007 season to make TEMPORARY room for Moss's Oakland contract.

Consequently, there will be an imbalance until some JAG gets a ridiculous NLTBE incentives deal, like Gorin's famous multimillion dollar incentive if he reached 15 special teams tackles. (Unless the specifics of that were just an urban legend.)

Alternatively, if Asante resigns he may get a lot of his money hitting the cap the first year. That would eat up the excess too, and might salve his ego as well. Why not give him a lowball contract in total value, a big bonus, and a big first-year salary, thus assuring he'll get every penny of the eventual contract -- and also giving him a huge collection of checks for this year?

Exactly. Our long term cap space is based on the total amount of money we actually spend on each player. If, as expected, Brady's has no impact on the total amount of money he receives, it will have no impact on our long term salary cap situation.

The restructuring is just an accounting move that moves cap space from the future into the present. In the future, other accounting moves (probably fake LTBE incentives) will appear on Miguel's page and have the effect of moving cap space from the present into the future.

Accounting gimmick, eh? Well, we can say the same about each and every salary contract ever signed in the salary cap era then.

Click to expand...

Yes, though not about salary. It is about signing bonus.

Deferred signing bonuses are just like charge cards. You owe the money you charged regardless.

Think of it like next year's vacation. You spent $400 on non-refundable airline tickets for a vacation next year, reserved another $800 in motels (cancelable without penalty), plan to spend another $1000 on vacation food and incidentals, and plan to buy $600 in theme park admissions.

Now you want to spend the money on a new car.

The $400 non-refundable airline tickets are like Colvin's signing bonus. It is dead money if you cancel the trip.

The $2400 is like Colvin's salary. You get that money back if you cancel the vacation.

You need a new car, and the trip you planned isn't looking so good anyway. Cancel the trip and save $2400. That is cutting Colvin. The $400 is dead money. Should you spend $2400 you don't want to spend just so the $400 isn't wasted?